More evidence that the civilian disarmament movement is fixing to shelve Senator Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Ban 2013 and “settle” for a bill limiting ammunition magazine capacity. While Joe Biden’s not completely wrong in his choice of post-SHTF firearms, he’s not right about accuracy and doesn’t have the capacity to understand the advantages of capacity. In fact, surprise! Joe Biden doesn’t know much about firearms. Or self-defense. Or criminals. Or much of anything, really.

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

If a revolution happens, we’ll just be able to shoot at them from the treeline with our Kentucky Rifles, and they’ll spit and call us uncivilized hick bastards as they stop their fighting for an hourly tea break.

Talking points memo is where the entire left (and most media outlets) get their core material. In fact, you can go there and get the full view of what will be on all the main news stations that day really quickly.

I just gained a lot more respect for sxephil. He’s the youtuber who was asking the question. He’s raised the red flag on a lot of internet/free speech rights and legislation in the past. It’s good to know he’s looking at 2A stuff, too.

I like how Biden basically decided that a pump shotgun was too much, specifically mentioning the double-barrel.

* effective range is substantially less than that of an intermediate-caliber rifle, enabling our newly militarized SWAT teams and local patrols (who all get AR-class rifles) to stand off at a safe distance and neutralize any threats

He said only government workers should have modern fire[arms], because if non government employees have modern fire[arms] the government would be in more danger when they are enforcing “the law,” compared to an armed populace who can choose to resist “the law.”

This man is delusional. He does not speak for law enforcement, we spoke in 2004 and the country heard us. I only wish our hands were not bound by military style discipline guidelines which prohibit making public statements while in uniform or in official capacity.

He’s just starting to frame his arguement for the goal they think they can achieve, the magazine capacity ban. See you don’t need a 30 round magazine when two shells from a shotgun are better….these aren’t the droids you’re looking for… It sounds stupid but uninformed Americans will buy it if we don’t educate them of the realities. Be prepared for more along the same lines.

Funny, I haven’t seen any mass resignations or firings over government employees refusing to enforce unconstitutional laws. “Law enforcement” speaks every day when it keeps enforcing these laws. Your paycheck is more important than your principles.

He is asking like a baby and referring to enforcement of currently standing laws. (One of the kids attracted here by Rob’s fanatic anitpolice postings).

I can say, that there is a large vocal push, at least from my perspective, of my co-workers, but its not public. Only Sheriff’s are speaking out. because they answer to the voters only and are not generally tied by poles.

The relative intimidation/ease-of-use factors of AR-15’s vs. double-barreled shotguns… That’s an interesting question, Mr. VP. I think I’ll go exercise my Second Amendment rights and buy one of each; that way I can test your hypothesis and decide for myself which one I’d rather use in a crisis. Oh, wait…

His unwarranted and baseless attack on atheists negates much of the value he established in the first half of his article.

I’m an atheist. I have more clarity and strength in my ethical and moral values than the vast majority of religious people I have known, and I have found this to be the rule rather than the exception among atheists.

Up is Down. Dept is Wealth. Spending is Saving. Freedom is Slavery. Oh, and now a Double Barrel shotgun is better than an AR for Home Defense. Someone better tell the army and the police right away….moron.

Actually, this is kinda cool, we got us a “tactical” VP, Joe Biden! Next video, Joe will walk us through clearing the upscale, urban condo using said coach gun with a surefire duct-taped to the barrel.

If were lucky, maybe we get Joe to give us his opinion on 9mm vs. .45, or .380 vs. .32??

“…..surefire duct-taped to the barrel.” LOL funny mental picture.
Technically shouldn’t that be barrels.
Between the four (4) specified calibers it’s a sure bet he would prefer the .32.
Of course it would have to be a derringer.
Single shot for self defense.
Double barreled for riot control.

It would seem to me that the fact that there are more MSRs on the streets now than ever before DOES suggest that banning them would have little to no effect on the murder rate in the U.S. It seems to me that a rational person would see that as evidence that they are rarely if ever used in crimes.

And that they don’t actually think it’s about crime, because the issue driving the agenda is the very rich and their political vassals worrying about how they can kept their peace, land, wealth if we experience another economic crisis and they have to drive up sales taxes to cover benefits for the formerly-had-parties poor folks. Corporate tax hikes instead? They’d drag down margins, share prices, and therefore tank the many “guaranteed investment contracts” outstanding… which would tank banks and insurance companies: the GIC’s are what Treasury Secretary Paulson was screaming about the day he demanded a bailout, his discretion to spend, immunity to law suits. Ain’t life grand?

“I’m much less concerned quite frankly about what you call an assault weapon than I am about magazines and the number of rounds that can be held in a magazine,” said Biden, who discussed gun violence during a Google hangout Thursday afternoon.

Biden is clearly signaling that he thinks AWB 2.0 is DOA, and that the White House is going to put all of their weight behind magazine capacity limits.

Which means that we need to work hard to defeat both the open threat of AWB 2.0 (the fight is NOT over until the bill is dead) AND the inevitable efforts to bundle a 10-round mag capacity limit into a must-pass bill.

Every time someone says we don’t need so called “assault weapons” for defense, why is it they always assume it’s only going to be one intruder involved in the situation? 30 round magazines exist so that the user can engage multiple hostile targets. What happens if 6 people break in your house and you have a little 5 shot peashooter .38 revolver or a coach gun like Biden mentioned?

You’re screwed in that instance, especially if the intruders are armed with superior or equal firepower than yours, hell even if they had .22’s they could keep your head down with suppressive fire and go in for the kill.

I was talking to three gun owners who believe in “common sense gun control” and that no one needs more than tem rounds. I refered to the woman in the attic and shooting her attacker several times. When I brought up what was she going to to if he didnt stop or had an accomplice I was told I cant say what if because it didnt happen. Then I was told she should have hit him instead of grazed him and she should have used a bigger caliber.

What if she couldnt control a bigger caliber, maybe she had a bigger caliber and that’s why she missed (flinched). 5.56 in low recoil thus more accurate for some people, but you should hit them more then once which is easy and because of the low recoil and big magazine. We were trained to double tap with the M4 at close range (inside 100m). Thus every civi using an m4 should double tap all the time so it’s really only a 15 engagement magazine and you may need to engage the same person more than once, especially if you live somewhere with a long police response time.

Memphis they need to play by the same rules. Saying she would have been ok with a larger caliber is the same as saying “what if”…what if she had a bigger caliber or didn’t graze him then she would have stopped him

I tried and failed to get through as well. Basically they blew it off as that many intruders being rare and hardly ever happening. That doesn’t make any sense! In my area home invasions are on the rise and they’re wising up on their tactics by utilizing strength in numbers.

I can’t remember the last time I heard of a home invasion around here that didn’t involve at least 3 people. Even if they were right about how rare it is, what’s wrong with being prepared for the worst of scenarios? These people don’t think things through.

When asked, “Why do you need X?” in that spiteful tone that so many progs are fond of speaking in, I tell the questioner to **** off. They don’t get to dictate to me what I need or don’t need. This is part of what’s wrong with today’s society. I’m not anyone’s “boy” and no one is my master. It’s insulting and degrading.

By trying to seriously answer their question and justify whatever it is that you need or want to them, you are feeding their sick ego and essentially subjugating yourself to them. This is a slave mentality that we’re taught early on when we’re children in school. We’re taught to always respect authority and try to answer every question. Some questions, like the one I outlined above and obviously loaded ones, should not be answered out of general principle in any way beyond “**** you.”

It’s not for them to decide.

If they want to ask me why people in general need 30 round mags that’s fine. But when they get personal with it, that’s going too far.

I agree 100%. I have also told them to get the hell out of my life but of course that just makes their appetite to interfere in my personal life just that much more voracious. Nothing with satiate these people until our arms are handed over so they can “feel safe”.

I note that on all pages of the manual an LEO’s 5.56 is called a Patrol Rifle. Suddenly on page 6 a terrorist has one, and it’s called an Assault Rifle. Same item. I wish people would insist on the Patrol Rifle nomenclature in all contexts. The pure propaganda (and marketing) purpose of the Assault Weapon nomenclature is to excite and bias people. We shouldn”t fall for it.

First: I want more firepower than the enemies of freedom coming to take my firearms away from me. I want more rounds in my magazine then the thugs being sent to disarm me. i.e. Peace through Superior Firepower.

Two: The Second Amendment is not about hunting, gun ownership, concealed carry, or high-capacity magazines… the 2nd Amendment is about my responsibility to the Security of a Free State. I have a responsibility to fight for the rights of all my fellow Countrymen.

Three: Joe, Mike, Dianne… you are right, we do not need assault weapons to hunt with. What we need assault weapons for is to provide Security from an oppressive government seeking to take our Constitutional Freedoms away from us. We simply hunt with them to perfect our marksmanship for when we need to take aim at the real problem.

FU Biden, why cant I have what I want? I can afford one, I’m a responsible citizen; no criminal record, no felonies, no mental health issues. I want a double barrel shotgun in the future, but I dont want to be restricted to just that.

We need to start charging Feinstein, Biden, and the rest of these anti-Constitution idiots with treason.

Definitely. Ole Joe, the Senator from MBNA. Skinned the middle and blue-collar class by eliminating Credit Card usury laws and pushing for greater enforcement. His voters in Delaware didn’t even notice it was him, because his opponent was a Republican and was afraid to raise the issue bluntly since he basically liked the concept.

This is what really annoys me. Few people recognize or oppose the economic carnage enabled by people like Biden. Essentially their 2A position is the same as their finance positions; disarm the people they supposedly represent and work for while granting advantage to those who would harm us.

Double barrel shotgun would be better than an AR…unless you miss …or > 2 people to defend against … or you need to make an accurate shot…or defending from a distance… or your sensitive to recoil …or in tight quarters… or you want a weapons light or modern optic/laser… or defending against an AR… Hmmm maybe not so good??

I watched this live and I was pleasantly surprised. When it started and the guests were introduced I was prepared for a gun grabbing circle-jerk.

I think Biden’s heart is in the right place, but he just doesn’t get it. He did make an interesting point about magazine capacity i.e. the Gabby Giffords shooting and how many times the Newtown shooter would have had to reload with only 10 round magazines. But, ultimately he still blames an object for the actions and intentions of a person.

There are a number of reasons why Joe Biden is an idiot on this topic. First, our soldiers don’t use double barrel shotguns, nor do our police officers. Biden is not protected by double barreled shotguns. If a double barrel is so good, then experienced shooters with their lives on the line would want them in their hands. Biden is a politician, not a tactician. An AR-15 is an excellent firearm for self defense – which is one of the reasons why our police use them. Biden may not like Glocks, but they are very effective handguns. Ask a police officer or secret service agent if they would restrict themselves to a 7 or 10 round magazine to appease the politicians.

Strange is the shotgun has a pistol grip its a assault weapon. And if your facing rioters in the dozens (ie post Hurricane Katrina, LA Riots.) A shot gun doesn’t have range accuracy and ammo capacity when facing many attacks. This is Slow Joe Biden the same man who told a crippled man to stand up in a awards ceremony for him.

His logic is so flawed. If fire arms death risk has gone down for the population in general, then it has gone down proportionally among LEOs as well, who make up a sub-set of that population. How is this man in office?

For all the blather an LEO’s job is not actually very dangerous. It isn’t one of the top ten dangerous jobs in the US either for mortality or injury. AR’s certainly have not been an important cause of LEO mortality in the past. Why, oh why, should the government assume that will change? They do seem (Feinstein, Pelosi, Biden, Bloomberg, et al) to have a view that this might change. They should spell it out.

It’s not that dangerous because it’s in the top 20 most dangerous jobs in the US instead of the top 10? If you’re job is more dangerous, then speak up. If not, then just report that few officers have ever encountered problems with ARs and AKs other than the North Hollywood incident.

Thought: “I’d rather have my double barrel shotgun that I know how to shoot than an AR that I would have to aim more carefully than I am capable of”

Says: “a shotgun will keep someone a lot safer than an assault rifle in someones hands who doesn’t know how to use it.”

Thought: “shit I just generalized my preference to being best for everyone, even people more skilled with rifles than me. That makes my suggestion about what is best for each person sound ridiculous.”

Says: “Or even someone who knows how to use it.”

Thought: “Shit that was close; I hope no one noticed that I said assault weapons can be a tool with a legitimate defensive use for civilians better than shotguns. Now I’ll show my knowledge about guns and talk persuasively about the weapons people would really select if they were serious about fighting off an armed mob, and hope that everyone already forgot about what I said about AWs being used to outgun police.”

Says: “Lots of bull shit not even Biden believes but he is sure he can sell.”

It is a great country. It just has a few issues to sort out, like increasing numbers of unskilled people dependent on the government, a ratio of workforce aged adults on Soc Sec Disability having gone from 1.5 to 7.2% in thirty-six years, 48 million on food stamps/SNAP, a 16 trillion dollar national debt growing by the day, ever-more concentration of economic benefits in the hands of fewer people who now are paranoid about Patrol Rifles, and an electorate the majority of whom do not read serious news. We’ll get through these.

A shotgun can be better than a semiauto rifle in a crowded environment where over penetration is a concern.I personally prefer a handgun like a 45 ACP or 45 Colt-not likely to go into the neighbor’s house but quite capable of stopping an intruder.The best shotgun for home defense is a Mossberg Persuader.

if you are the greatest gunner around, you take down two, leaving one threat that you are unable to counter for say 10 seconds, it only takes the bad guy 3 of em to empty a revolver into you.

If i have an AR with 30 rounds and a spare mag,
then i have 10 rounds per intruder, given a 50 percent hit (average shooter) you hit each with 5 should stop their assault. then you reload with your spare and are ready.
much nicer then the Shotgun.
just saying…

It is the best time to make some plans for the future and it is time to be happy. I’ve read this put up and if I could I desire to recommend you some attention-grabbing things or suggestions. Maybe you could write subsequent articles referring to this article. I wish to read more things approximately it!